Mail Archives: cygwin/2009/10/01/09:31:39
Phil Betts wrote:
> There's a tree package available from here:
> http://lassauge.free.fr/cygwin/release/
Oooh, I didn't know about that at all. Somebody's actually using the key
management features in setup.exe and signing their custom setup.ini! Good,
maybe we can get some end-user feedback from them at some point.
> I've no idea if this was the origin of the posted binary, but
> these packages DO come with source.
>
> I used to find these packages quite useful, but many packages had
> dependencies that conflicted with official cygwin packages'
> dependencies so I stopped using them. You should be OK with tree
> though.
Heh. Sorry to bang on about it, but I'm making a point about the GPL.
Sure, it's easy to find the upstream sources
(http://mama.indstate.edu/users/ice/tree/), or the sources to *some other*
executable, but I want the actual sources used to build the actual executable
that was sent to me. By sending out that binary, tianlijian AT gmail was
accepting the terms of the GPL, and that means giving the sources *to that
particular binary* to anyone who wants them.
tianlijian? You can come back, I'm not about to sue you! But everyone
should understand that the GPL obligations are real and apply to each and
every one of us every single time we pass on GPL software to absolutely anyone
in any form; it's not just some theoretical legal obligation that only big
companies like Red Hat & co. have to stick to.
BTW, I finally found out what the tree program uses system() for. And I'll
be posting it to TDWTF when I can find a moment, because it's fairly
mind-bogglingly daft!
cheers,
DaveK
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -